Safer gambling and the reduction of gambling related harm | Engagement Director at Better Change (Gibraltar) Ltd
My “£2 spin” on today’s announcement. I completely get why the decision has been made to bring online stake sizes inline with those offline (try saying that after a few beers, which you can spend as much as you like on BTW, just saying!) as well as putting in extra protections for 18–25-year-olds. But doesn’t it yet again seem like lazy legislation? I occasionally play slot games above a £5 stake (yes that’s right I am over 25) and whilst it won’t be a huge loss to me that I won’t be able to “legally” play this way, I do find it a real shame that our governments only strategy when it comes to safer gambling is to limit, block, ban and stigmatise. Shouldn’t we be educating players instead and working on effective prevention strategies as opposed to restrictive ones? It might also be worth pointing out that putting these restrictive measures in place might be a bit of an own goal as the government also aim to raise £60-£100 million through a mandatory levy 😮 Remember less GGY = less levy and not necessarily less harm! #PositivePlay
I think calling this "lazy" doesn't go far enough. It's tone deaf and ignorant of the science, let alone logic. Let's be perfectly clear, higher stakes do not (in most instances) cause the addiction, or at least not directly so much as they're symptomatic. Instead what we are likely to see (and it's common enough in retail since £2 spins came in that we can call a spade a spade): the same at-risk people exhibiting high risk behaviours and losing a similar amount of money over an admittedly slightly longer period of time. £5 spins is still £7.2k an hour if the gambler is consistently hitting spin on a 2.5 second slot game.
Jordan Lea
6mo
Stop talking sense, they don't want it catching on.
Matthew Hickey
6mo
Spot on Rob. The comparison to alcohol consumption is really interesting, you can drink as much as you like at 18, as often as you like, where ever you like with no control, sometimes resulting in physical damage to yourself / hospitalisation for over consumption etc etc., which you could do over and over again with no way of anyone other than family/friends doing anything about it. Almost certain that all this will do is create channels into an unregulated market, which can’t be monitored. From all of those I have spoken to over the years who have a gambling addiction, it’s never how much they can bet that is the issue… bigger amounts of money don’t lead to addiction. Prevention led approach is key, which integrates into treatment when necessary.
John ross C.
6mo
I do agree with “Prevention is better than cure” In this case proper knowledge on gambling and koney management is one good way to help them avoid addiction. In fact, betting is classifed as leisure and it should be enjoyed by those who could afford it.
Ian Gosling
6mo
Join the army and fight for your country, get married, smoke cigarettes, drink alcohol, enter a casino, watch an X rated, movie, fly accompanied, sit on a jury, serve a jail term but don’t play a slot machine!!!!
Stephen M.
6mo
My take on it remains unchanged The majority of operators have openly target younger players leading to far more problematic players. These operators continue to see fines for this as "The cost of doing business" Yes the legislation is lazy Yes it's a sop to land based operators because there's more money to be made their in taxation But also, it's a reminder that one operator getting an under 25 to play excessively without proper protections creates a problem player that multiple other operators will have to deal with further down the line (as research shows, one you start restricting problem players, they're already beyond educating, they just take their business to another operator, and play the sane way, until they eventually end up on grey and unregulated sites). So spend the money on education about Addiction and the causes of Addiction early in life and prevent the start of this cycle
I predict....what everyone else here has predicted. Less legitimate take and a move from the regulated, legal, sector to the non-regulated, illegal sector.
A really good reasoned argument.
There are lots of responsible gambling advocates who seem to want higher betting limits than those proposed by government... and they talk a lot about the need for investment in gambling education. Are some doing this to protect their roles within the "industry" of responsible gambling?